Getting the Right Fit - Designing a Professional Learning Community for Out-of-School Time

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Stanley

A research-based discussion examines why high-quality out-of-school time (OST) programs depend on effectively prepared staff, noting that typical training workshops often fail to meet youth developmental needs or create learning environments distinct from school. The document argues for professional learning communities (PLCs) as a practice-focused alternative shown to improve staff work with youth, then outlines how PLCs function in OST settings, including cohort structure, workshop goals, lifecycle phases, and facilitator techniques.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages12

Reading Time30 min

AccessFree to download

Learning Targets and PLC Agenda

Session activities and homework

PLC Lifecycle and Implementation

Phases of a thriving PLC

Methods

Interviews with PLC facilitators

Getting the Right Fit: Designing a Professional Learning Community for Out-of-School Time Femi Vance, Emily Salvaterra, Jocelyn Atkins Michelsen, and Corey Newhouse A skilled workforce is critical in high-quality out-ofschool time (OST) programs (Smith, Devaney, Akiva & Sugar, 2009) . However, the workshops commonly used to train OST staff are not adequately preparing practitioners to deliver quality programs that can beneﬁt youth (Durlak & Weissberg, 2007; Smith et al, 2009) . This issue is evident from ongoing discussions about how to train OST staff to respond to youths’ developmental needs while creating a learning environment distinct from school (Bouffard & Little, 2004; Bowie & Bronte-Tinkew, 2006) . Professional learning communities (PLCs) are a practice-focused alternative that has a track record of improving the way staff work with youth (Thompson, Gregg, & Niska, 2004; Vescio, Ross, & Adams, 2008) . PLCs, though relatively new in OST, are growing in popularity. For instance, the Weikart Center for Youth Program Quality encourages programs to create PLCs for continuous quality improvement (Smith et al. , FEMI VANCE, PhD, is a research associate at the University of San Diego who studies professional development for informal educators and skill building in youth programs. She partners with school and community-based programs to provide evaluation and technical assistance. Her PhD is in educational policy from the University of California, Irvine. EMILY SALVATERRA, MPA, is a researcher in the ﬁelds of youth development and housing and homelessness. Currently a policy analyst at HomeBase, she holds a master of public affairs degree from the University of San Francisco. Her professional experience includes program implementation and evaluation, data management and analysis, and community policy planning. JOCELYN ATKINS MICHELSEN, MPA, is a senior research associate at Public Proﬁt, an evaluation consultancy for youth service organizations. Her experience includes leading projects assessing public health, professional development, out-of-school time, and community partnerships in the U. S. and abroad. She earned a master of public administration degree from New York University. COREY NEWHOUSE, MPP, is the founder and principal of Public Proﬁt, an evaluation consultancy for youth service organizations. She has a wide range of experience in evaluating programs that serve children and families, including multisite evaluations of educational and youth development programs. She earned her master’s degree in public policy at the University of California, Berkeley. Table 1. Professional Learning Community Sample Agenda Learning Targets • I will reﬂect on my program’s strengths and challenges and then develop at least one strategy to address a challenge. • I will practice at least one new facilitation strategy that I can use in my program. Activity Check in and debrief on progress since last session Introduction of new content Time to practice new content Debrief practice Homework, feedback, reﬂection, closing Description Check-in questions: What’s one thing you’ve been thinking about since we last met? What’s one thing you’ve done to make progress on the goal you set last session? Facilitator introduces and shows examples of new activity. Working in small groups, participants taking turns role-playing different parts of activity. Facilitator circulates. Discussion or write-up in small groups and then in the large group: What felt easy? What didn’t feel so easy? What might feel different when you take this back to your program? Homework: schedule observation of another participant’s program Feedback: session evaluation form Reﬂection questions: I learned… I will… I would like to know more about 2012) . In California, district and state partners created several PLCs in an effort to improve OST staff knowledge and practice in speciﬁc content areas such as science and character

FAQs

Why does the document focus on professional learning communities for OST programs?

It explains that common OST staff training workshops are not adequately preparing practitioners to deliver quality programs for youth, while PLCs have a track record of improving staff practices.

How is a typical PLC structured in the document?

A PLC engages a cohort of about 10 to 15 professionals across multiple workshops aimed at a shared goal; workshop length and frequency depend on group needs.

What are the lifecycle phases of a thriving PLC mentioned in the document?

The document lists six phases: building group understanding, acquiring expertise, practicing skills, solving problems, contributing new knowledge, and creating original products, after which the PLC either renews or disbands.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Stanley